What is pollution?

[wanlock dod]

I was reaing a thread here abouts that strayed into the area of pollution, what it is, and what might cause it. This is the part that caulght my attention:

Originally Posted by Dorts

Pollutant. Definition:
something causing pollution: a substance that pollutes something, e.g. a chemical or waste product contaminating the air, soil, or water.
You cannot contaminate air with a natural gas. It's like saying we are putting too much water into water!

Can a pollutant be defined without having to make reference to pollution (it is clearly a very closely related word)?

So, I ask, can one cause pollution with a naturally occuring material or substance?
What is the difference between pollution and contamination?
If pollution does occur how will we know?

Dod

[Dorts]

Hi again Dod.
I'm, happy to make the first response as it was me you quoted.
My quote I believe related to the present rise in CO2, and my opinion was that the rise in that gas in the atmosphere should not be looked upon as 'pollution', for if it was, all previous much higher levels of that gas would have to be considered as 'pollution' also, when in fact they were very benificial to the life on the planet at the time.
If we tip a bucket of sand onto a sandy beach, is that pollution? Probably not. But if we put tons of mercury into the oceans, then it probably is.

I suppose the questions that should be asked are:
'Is it benificial?'
'Is it inert?'
'Is it toxic?'
'Is it causing harm?'
Polution comes in many forms, such as visual, light, sound, smell etc. many are purely subjective and are probably more of an annoyance than a pollutant, whereas others are obviously extremely harmfull.
You have raised a rather interesting question Dod.
Dorts.

[Mitty]

I would say pollution is contamination linked to human activity, with the containment being organic or synthetic - containment being something that causes a negative disruption to system/biota (hm, hope I am making sense)

If the disruption happens naturally it causes degradation but can be naturally absorbed/balanced.

Pollution is usually described as being in 'such concentrations to cause harm', I guess this is because it cannot be readily absorbed. ...So how much milk do you have to pour in a river before you cause pollution and would it be pollution if the cows managed to drop it in the river themselves?

[Paul mabbott]

A lot of people confine their definition of pollution to the contamination of natural environments by human activity. However, the definition given in Wikipedia ( Pollution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) is more comprehensive:

'Pollution is the introduction of contaminants into a natural environment that causes instability, disorder, harm or discomfort to the ecosystem i.e. physical systems or living organisms. Pollution can take the form of chemical substances or energy, such as noise, heat, or light. Pollutants, the elements of pollution, can be foreign substances or energies, or naturally occurring; when naturally occurring, they are considered contaminants when they exceed natural levels.'

The critical element here is the exceeding 'natural levels', thus a major volcanic explosion is a pollution event. Similarly, a river dissolves chemicals (natural or industrial) from the ground and distributes them elsewhere; if the concentration stays at low, non-toxic levels then it's not pollution, but if the substance causes damage to plants, animals, the overall environment, then it is pollution.

[bigdave60dog]

Maybe it`s like love "covers a multitude of sins" or beauty "In th eye of the beholder" Perhaps it is a third thing in life from which we cannot escape -after "Death and taxes".
Good question though.
Dave

[pressld2]

There is a definition of a weed as "a plant growing in the wrong place". To me a pollutant is simply a substance in the wrong place. Or I suppose more specifically, an excess of a substance in the wrong place. And I would agree that the "substance" could be heat, light or noise as well as chemical in nature.

I see no reason why natural substances cannot be called pollutants when they end up in large quantities in the wrong place. Indeed they very often are. For example, oil is a naturally occuring substance that is not considered a pollutant when it is lying underground between strata of rock, but when it's spread all over a coastline and killing wildlife it most certainly is!

Dave P.

[bigdave60dog]

[quote=pressld2;732621]There is a definition of a weed as "a plant growing in the wrong place". To me a pollutant is simply a substance in the wrong place. Or I suppose more specifically, an excess of a substance in the wrong place. And I would agree that the "substance" could be heat, light or noise as well as chemical in nature.

I see no reason why natural substances cannot be called pollutants when they end up in large quantities in the wrong place. Indeed they very often are. For example, oil is a naturally occuring substance that is not considered a pollutant when it is lying underground between strata of rock, but when it's spread all over a coastline and killing wildlife it most certainly is!

Dave P.[/QUOTE
Yeah! like silage effluent or Slurry getting into rivers is obvious. Less obvious would be seawater getting into freshwater. Grass cuttings in lakes etc. Or even when algae in the sea die off removing oxygen thus killing sea life. In this case the dead algae become a pollutant.Or do they create a pollutant?
I thinks that the Op wanted a working definition of a pollutant. When I was at university we had endless discussions about the definition of poverty, health, Happiness, etc.
That sort of thing.
Dave

[The Woodman]

Malawi considers form of pollution

BBC News - Malawi row over whether new law bans farting

[Farplace]

Originally Posted by The Woodman

Malawi considers form of pollution

BBC News - Malawi row over whether new law bans farting

Casper, my Rottweiler, DEFINATELY pollutes the air. He'd be banned from Malawi.....

[tom00_uk]

Pollution is the introduction of contaminants into a natural environment that causes instability. These days we tend to associate as an anthropogenic event.

Though you will see reference's to volcanic events, forest fires (natural ignition source) and water courses that carry a naturally high metal load.

pressld2 - in your example the oil was first extracted and then contained before its uncontrolled release by man.
But you can go to tar pits and oil sand beds and see oil as it formed in large quantities exposed to degradation in the atmosphere, (there will be a certain amount of animals exposed and killed by these natural sources). Though in this instance that happens to be the local environment, as opposed to the coast of Brittany when Erika was lost to the sea.

wanlock dod - though they can be inter-used the way i have tended to come across and use pollution and contamination is-

Pollution is a short term event that might effect the individual but a population as a whole will more than likely show no signs of disturbance other than the lose of that individual.

Contamination tends to last longer and span generations, be it directly making an area inhospitable, by eliminating some thing that was required by a species within the contamination zone to succeed. or indirectly though a effect on future generations either from a reduced fecundity in that population or teratogenic effects where the parent is able to reproduce but the progeny are either not carried full term or born with defects that will result in them being unable to reproduce either directly though affects on the sex organs or through the inability to survive predation etc